|
Allama Iqbal - Ghaaratgar
Millat
Allama Iqbal - Deceiver
of the Nation
Original article in Urdu
written by Anwar Shaikh
English translation by Suhail
Ahmed |
Editorial
| In the Quran, it is stated several times
that Allah, the most high, has divided humanity into tribes and nations,
and thus made nationality their characteristic. England, Germany, France
-- are names which refer to nations which are not only morally much more
advanced than nations of the East, but have taken humanity from the earth
to the very skies. However, Muslims of the Indian subcontinent insist that
nationalism and patriotism are Satanic concepts, and that there is no
place for them in Islam. This is in spite of the fact that not only the
Quran endorses the concept of nation, and the Hadith confirms this fact,
but the entire lifetime of the Prophet illustrates it in actual practice.
The Muslims of the subcontinent, as has been said
above, have rejected this fact. It is not religious sentiment that is
responsible for this state of affairs. The cause lies in moral decline and
lack of national pride.
Only such a person can stand on his own two legs
as has two legs. What can one without two legs do but crawl ? The success
of Islamic invaders in India was based on their propaganda. They were the
sole rulers of the people of India. They maintained their hold on this
land not as Muslims, but as Iranians, Turks or Mughals, and in fulfillment
of their designs, they used the idea of an Islamic "millat" as
an excuse to deny Indian Muslims a feeling of nationhood. This was done
because it is impossible to keep a people with a deep sense of patriotism
enslaved. It is ironical that the foreign invaders have remained Turks,
Mughals and Qizilbashes, but Indian Muslims have begun to hate their
roots, that is Indian culture on account of the moral decline that goes
with a loss of national consciousness.
Pan-Islamism is a drug which has been very
effective on the Muslims of Bharat, Pakistan and Bangladesh. It is a trick
used ingeniously by power-holders and vested interests. Allama Iqbal was
one of these people. By singing the virtues of breaking national barriers,
he achieved the reputation of being a mystic and reformer, (which even
dwarfed Prophethood.) He shed tears for "love of the Prophet",
and concealed his ambitions of achieving spiritual distinction behind a
mask of devotion to the Prophet. Addressing the issue of such intellectual
inconsistencies, the Quran has said, "Only they follow they poets who
have lost their way. For have you not seen that they wander in the
valleys, and that they do not do as they say." (26: 224-26). Iqbal
was an impractical poet. The Quran has criticized the likes of him in no
uncertain terms. Therefore his writings cannot be considered an
interpretation of Islam, nor used as a personal guide.
To eulogize Iqbal in furtherance of personal
goals has become a tool in the hands of doctors, professors and the ulema.
The time has come for us to examine Iqbal's doctrines rationally. When I
take a look at "Iqbalism" in this way, I see a
"nation-robber". To shatter the worlds of crores of Indian
Muslims and to push them into a veritable hell, is no service to Islam.
My article "AllamaIqbal: Deceiver of the
Nation" is an invitation to deeper thought, extended to everyone
without restriction. My intention is not to ridicule Iqbal -- he was a
great poet. |
Allama Iqbal - Deceiver of the Nation
Was Iqbal the architect of Pakistan ? His
son Munib Iqbal expressed an opinion in the newspaper Jang dated 8 May 1996.
According to him, Allama Iqbal had not envisaged the partition of the country,
but his aim was to see Muslims in an economically sound position. Munib Iqbal's
statement contradicts the opinion widespread among Pakistanis that Allama Iqbal
was the originator of the idea of Pakistan. In other words, Munib Iqbal claims
that the idea that the Muslims of India were a separate nation, unrelated to the
Hindus, and that their freedom and well-being were not guaranteed except in a
separate homeland (Pakistan), was not the creation of the Allama's mind. What
are the facts?
Scholars writing on Iqbal claim that in his
presidential address to the Muslim League in Allahabad in 1930, the said Allama
had called for Punjab, the North West Frontier Province, Sindh, and Baluchistan
to be consolidated into one province. He did not intend to separate it from
India, but to turn it into a federal state. It is another matter that people saw
it as a fore-runner to the Pakistan idea, which culminated in the Partition of
India. They think that the person who really wanted the partition of India was
Chaudhry Rahmat Ali. It is necessary to keep in mind that Iqbal's proposal was
not taken seriously at that time. M.A. Jinnah, also known as the Quaid-i-Azam,
explained to Frank Moraes: "Iqbal is not a politician but a poet, and poets
live in their own world of imagination."
After this speech, not only Hindus but also Muslims
began to view Iqbal with suspicion. This why when Jinnah made a pact with Sir
Sikander in 1938, Iqbal's position in Muslim League circles in the Punjab became
weak. Thus when 'Iqbal Day' was celebrated in Lahore on 2nd December 1937, in
spite of the strong desire of Iqbal's admirers, Jinnah did not send him a
congratulatory message.
The purport of the present piece of research is that
Jinnah and Iqbal did not have much ideological affinity, and all that transpired
between them was the result of political necessity. To claim that Iqbal was the
architect of Pakistan and to consider him a symbol of Pakistani nationalism, are
ideas that came later.
According to another opinion, Iqbal by no means wanted
the Muslims of India to accept the version of nationalism proposed by the
Congress, and to lose their Islamic and cultural identity. For this reason, he
was in favor of the formation of an independent country. In addition, Indian
nationalism flew the flag of secularism, whereas the ideologues of Pakistan (M.
Iqbal) was vehemently opposed to the separation of spirit and matter, and of
politics and religion.
Whether Iqbal supported a Federal India or wished for a
separate independent Pakistan, the responsibility of making the people mentally
prepared for the formation of Pakistan falls squarely on him. He knew that there
was only one way to mobilize or control the Muslims of India, and that was
Islam. Religious magic had made the mind of the Muslims insensitive to such an
extent that they do not hesitate to sacrifice their parents or children for the
greater glory of the Prophet. Rational and moral arguments completely lose their
meaning for them. This is a psychological state whose attempted remedy is
nothing more than a mirage. That is, meaningless things are considered
meaningful, and sought after feverishly. Iqbal was a great poet -- he used his
prowess like a wizard. As an example, consider the following verses:
- Better than the whole world is our India,
We are its nightingales, and it is our garden !
- O waters of the Ganges river ! do you remember
The day when our caravan stopped on your banks ?
- Religion does not teach mutual enmity,
We are Indians, and India is our homeland !
These verses are from his famous poem "Tarana-i-Hind"
which are quoted as proof of his love for India, but which are actually a great
blow to the well-being of Indian nationalism.
In the second verse, the Ganga, India's holiest river
has been addressed. It is claimed that the Muslims of India are not of the
Indian race but are descended from foreign invaders. The Ganga is told not to
forget the day when "our (the Muslims') victorious caravan camped on its
banks."
In the third verse, the poet condescendingly says, by
way of formality, that "We are Indians, and India is our country".
In fact, Iqbal considered himself not Indian by race,
but a privileged descendant of foreign invaders, though he was of Kashmiri
Brahmin origins. His grandfather Sahaj Ram Sapru was an official in Kashmir's
revenue department. He was banished from there on charges of embezzlement, and
he took up residence in Sialkot (Punjab). Iqbal's father, who had accepted
Ahmediya faith was called Nathu - on account of his Hindu background. His wife,
Imam Bibi was also a follower of Mirza Ghulam Ahmed Qadiani. It is ironical that
the grandson of a Kashmiri Brahmin whose ancestors lived in Kashmir centuries
before the advent of Islam should consider himself a scion of foreign invaders.
Why ? There are many reasons, but here I will focus on the psychological reason,
and discuss the others later.
A drowning man, it is said, will clutch at a straw.
This is the case with Indian Muslims as well. The foreign invaders had weakened
their sense of distinct national identity, just as the light of the sun renders
a lamp insignificant, or the sheer expanse of desert causes a traveler to feel
that his thirst is fatal. The curse of slavery had paralyzed them so that they
did not have the courage to fight and win the blessing of freedom. They took the
only way available to the spiritually diseased. A rejected suitor is an example
of this situation. To escape the bitterness of reality, he delights himself with
flights of fancy, and makes do with self-deception. Similarly, the Indian
Muslims tried to escape the shame of their national and individual inferiority,
and like Iqbal, denied their Indian nationality, and accepted Islam in order to
forge relations with their foreign invaders. Not only that, they began to fake
their genealogies and to derive pleasure from false glories. They began to style
themselves as Syed, Qureishi, Farooqi, Siddiqi, Mughal, Mirza. Malik and
Chaghtai, though 95% of the Muslims of the subcontinent are Hindus by race.
A nationality is made up of blood ties, a homeland,
language and culture, and religion is one of its weaker elements. Arabs, Turks
and Iranians continue to be Arabs, Turks and Iranians in spite of being Muslims.
This is due to their great customs and love of their homeland, qualities which
not only turn a certain group into a nation, but engender feelings of service to
the nation, and give birth to a moral conscience which becomes the basis of
societal and individual glory. Ask any parents if their children cease to be
their children if they embrace another religion. Change in religion makes no
difference to relations of blood. Thinking people could never agree to the
command of Islam that one should sever ties with non-Muslim parents or children.
Centuries of slavery put the people of India in a
spiritual crisis which wounded their national identity so badly that to be
Indian was felt to be an insult.
Allama Iqbal was aware that the Muslims of India were
ashamed of their nationality due to an inferiority complex and were eagerly
awaiting a spiritual remedy. Sir Syed Ahmad was also aware of the truth. He not
only declared the Muslims of India to be a separate nation, but also claimed
that Muslims have been rulers in India and that Hindus were no more than a
subject people. On the basis of a popular idea, Mohammed Ali Jinnah asked the
British to hand over India to the Muslims, since (he said) they had taken India
from the Muslims. The British did not agree with this argument because they knew
that they had wrested the country from the Mughals, and 'Muslims' were not a
nation but a religious group. They would have had to hand India over to the
Muslims of the whole world ! Jinnah did not remember that he belonged to the
Khoja family, which, like Gandhi, is a branch of the Gujarati merchant
community.
For his own popularity, Iqbal gave his poetry a new
twist, in order to exploit the psychological state of Indian Muslims. He became
an advocate of the principle that Islam has nothing to do with one's nation or
homeland. This is completely contrary to the Quranic viewpoint, and with the
national history of the Muslims of the world. Iqbal stuck to this doctrine for
personal glory. What was his earliest poetry like ? He was a national poet of
India, beyond distinctions of religion. He saw every particle of dust of the
land of India as a deity. As he says in his poem, 'Naya Shivala':
Let me tell you truth, O Brahmin, if you would not be
offended,
The idols of your temple have become old.
From your graven images you have learned to despise your own people,
God has also taught the preacher war and strife.
You think that God dwells in images of stone,
But to me every particle of the soil of the homeland is a deity.
Come, let us lift up the curtain of estrangement,
Let us unite the separated, and wipe out all trace of duality.
The city of the heart has been desolate for a long time now;
Come let us build a new Shivala in this land.
Let our 'tirth' be higher than the pilgrimage centres of the world,
Let us reach its 'kalas' to the very skies;
Let us sing those sweet 'mantars' upon arising every morning,
Let us make all the priests drink the sweet wine of love.
In the song of the devotees are both Peace and Power,
The salvation of the earth's peoples is in love.
What a glorious poem ! Currents of patriotism making
waves, like eddies in a stream ! The zeal of a preacher, the sincerity of a
righteous man, and the feeling of Indianness are all at work here. Here the poet
is not seeing visions of the foundation of Pakistan. He sees every particle of
Indian soil as divine. The mere thought of partitioning such a homeland is a
great crime, and nothing short of treason. With patriotism, the thought of
building a new "Shivala" went hand-in-hand.
What is this new "Shivala" ? "Shivala"
is a temple or site dedicated to the god Shiva. Here the poet is desirous of
creating a new form of Indian nation. However the foundation of this temple was
not Islam, but Indian tradition, which calls upon all Indians irrespective of
religion to sing sweet Vedic hymns instead of Quranic verses. These hymns are
sweet wine for everyone with devotion. The poet is convinced that the mantras of
the devout are such songs as have both power and solace for the soul. He seems
convinced that the happiness of the people living in India lies in unity and
mutual cooperation.
This is one of Iqbal's didactic poems. He had learned
that the "Mukti or deliverance of the people of India depended on mutual
friendship. In Iqbal's early poetry, love of homeland is a theme that emerges in
several places, and this point of view springs from his Brahmanical blood. His
grandfather was Hindu -- his customs would surely have had some influence on the
grandson.
Later on the problem of his ego became so intense that
Indian nationalism no longer mattered. He forgot his origins, and to make a name
for himself in history, he began to preach against patriotism and nationalism in
the name of Islam. Islam is opposed to neither patriotism nor nationalism. This
is the reason why the highest ulema of India opposed the partition, but for some
reason, avoided providing arguments and evidence needed to defend their stance.
In view of the political conditions prevailing in the subcontinent, an
explanation of Islam's theory of nationalism is as necessary today as it was a
hundred years ago. This land needs peace and prosperity. Without them, these
countries will decline both culturally and economically.
Is Islam opposed to nationalism and patriotism ? The
truth is that Islam actually supports a healthy patriotism. But it has no place
for fascism, which denounces human and moral values in its glorification of
national interest and pride.
Nationalism and patriotism are concepts without which
progress in human civilization is not possible. This is because children are
born as a result of the union of woman and man, and they carry with them a
feeling of being brother or sister based on relations of blood. With time these
children and their descendants form families, tribes and nations -- a chain
whose links are relations of blood. The greater part of the relations forming
this national consciousness consists of traditions, which are called national
culture. This is the reason why every nation desires to keep its culture alive.
Patriotism plays a vital role in national consciousness. This is because people
need a place to live. The collective residence is called a homeland, whose
geographical characteristics have a deep influence on the actions and cultural
ways of its residents. The heights of a nation's greatness or the depths to
which it sinks are related to the patriotism it exhibits. Patriotic nations
attain glory in the world, but nations which are enemies of patriotism sink into
misery. This is an undeniable fact. Is it not surprising that on the one hand
Iqbal ridiculed the notion of homeland, but on the other hand, he wanted a
separate homeland for the Muslims of India ? The fact is that without a
homeland, life would be impossible.
Nationalism is a natural impulse. The Quran endorses
this fact. It is another matter that egotists have presented the Quranic
teachings in a false light. This becomes clear by looking at the following
Quranic verses:
"O people ! We have created you from a man and a
woman, and made tribes and nations out of you, so that you could have a
identity distinct from one another. The closest to God from among you is he
who is most abstinent." (Al-Hujrat: 13:49)
This verse confirms what I have just said, that for tribes
and nations to arise out of the unions of man and woman, is a natural impulse.
Their basis is kinship ties, and not religion. This verse makes it clear that
without nationality, humans have no identity.
Here the word 'identity' is very important from a
civilizational point of view, because without it, progress would be impossible
in human societies. Even if Darwin's theory of evolution is considered
incomplete, it is still undeniable that human civilizations cannot make progress
without the mutual struggle of nations. One nation strengthens itself and
acquires power over other nations. The vanquished nations improve themselves by
continuous effort and become strong, and gain their freedom. For example, Hitler
took his country to great heights of scientific and military prowess. The
nations who were overrun liberated themselves through similar progress. As a
consequence, today every nation wants to win the race in the field of education,
industry and military might. The secret of the stunning progress made in the
present age in this competition among nations. Countries which are successful in
this race acquire honour and prestige, and this glory becomes their
characteristic (identity), which the Quran has referred to. However, the
condition of "restraint" or "abstinence" has also been
imposed on this competitiveness, so that international struggles do not run
counter to moral and human values and degenerate into fascism.When God has
divided mankind into tribes and nations, and made national activity their
identity, how Islamic is it to invoke Islam and deny patriotism ?
It is said in sura Hood 11:118,
"If your Lord had wished, he could have made all
people one nation..."
Also in Sura Al-Maira (5:48) it is said:
"If Allah had wished, he would have made you one
nation."
It is clear that for people to belong to only one group,
ummah or nation is at variance with the divine will. The reason behind this is
that without competition among nations, human progress is impossible. It is a
fact that the Quran has given a very important place to the concept of nation in
human society. For instance, it is said in Sura (10:45-47) Younis, "Every
people has its own prophet comes, he settles disputed matters." "Every
nation has its appointed hour. No one can delay it by even a moment, nor can it
be hastened. "
These verses make it clear that human lives are not
merely individual affairs, but also have a national aspect to them. Nationality
has such an important role in human civilization that God has not only divide
mankind into nations, but has also established a rule of sending every nation
its prophet. This is because every prophet knows the language and customs of his
people best, and without them national understanding and improvement would not
be possible. Not only that, God has appointed a collective time for every nation
which cannot be delayed or hastened.
A prophet is a reformer of his people. This does not
mean he seeks the ruination of other people. His policy is "Charity begins
at home". He tries to help other nations by means of the actions of his own
people. Consider, for example, the case of Egypt and Iran. The Prophet organized
the Arabs. The Arabs carried Islam to Egypt and Iran through their invasions.
But they have remained slaves of the Arabs for centuries.
The national work of the prophet is abundantly clear
from the following verse:
"By the clear book, We have written the Quran in
Arabic, so that you may understand" (43: 2-3, Al-Yarireh).
For the convenience of readers, and keeping in mind the
delicateness and importance of the argument, it is necessary to say that:
1) Allah the Most High has sworn by the 'clear book' (Quran),
called thus because there is no ambiguity in its reading, and the truths
expounded in it cannot be refuted.
2) In this verse, Allah the Most High has addressed the
Arabs and said that the Quran has been given in Arabic so that Arabs could
understand the purpose behind its being sent down.
There is no contradiction here because every people has
its own prophet, so Hazrat Mohammed (PBUH) was basically a prophet of the Arabs.
Otherwise, there would have been no necessity for the Quran to be in Arabic - it
could well have been in Farsi or Sanskrit.
This is the reason the prophet (PBUH) first organized
and reformed the Arabs and then with his victorious conquests established Arab
hegemony over the world. Thus he was not only a prophet but also the founder of
the Arab empire. it is another matter that the Muslims of the subcontinent,
having been deprived of national pride, have begun to consider the Arab Empire
as an Islamic Empire. After all, the poor creatures have no history of their
own. What other solution do they have for their decline and national shame but
rationalization? What does it mean to be a Muslim? This is answered in the
following verse:
"For you (the believers) following the Prophet is
the best way, and this is for those who hope to see God on the Day of
Judgment" (Al-Ahrab 33-21)
What is the 'best way'? This is explained in the Hadith (Jame'e
Hadith):
"Love of homeland is from (a part of ) the
faith".
Those who are familiar with the Quran, the Hadis and the
biographies of the Prophet know that the Prophet's entire lifetime was a
commentary on this Hadis. It is only narrow-minded people who do not understand
the secrets of nationalism. The Quran clearly says that if God had wanted he
could have made people be born in one nation only, but that he did not do so on
purpose. He made nationality the characteristic of individuals, and groups, so
that it may be known which nation is greater. But the Quran has also imposed the
condition that the greater nation is one whose morals are superior. A nation
does not gain standing by by sole virtue of being Russian, American or English.
The Quranic point of view says that nation is higher which can uplift the
cultural standards of fallen nations by its moral power. The Quranic verse that
"every nation has its prophet" confirms the fact that God sends
prophets to reform nations. The reformed nation changes the standards of
backward or lost nations by its moral model.
The first duty of a prophet is the upliftment of his
people and homeland. A weak moribund nation cannot carry anybody else's burden.
This is why the Prophet (PBUH) said clearly, in order
to instill Arabism among the Arabs:
"You are the best among nations, because you ask
for good deeds to be done, and forbid evil deeds..." (Al-e Imran, 3:110).
Here the Arabs are being addressed, for at this time no
other nation was Muslim yet. The Quran says clearly that the Arabs are the
greatest people only to bestow upon them a sense of superiority. But the basis
for this superiority is not race, but moral standing, owing to which they were
compelled to prevent the nations of the world from becoming evil, and to turn
towards good. But it must be borne in mind that God has determined the criterion
for greatness for every nation, which is related to its moral standards. A
nation which loses its moral level also loses its glory. Thus countries with
greater moral standards are superior to those whose characters are bad.
The truth is that even God wants to be related to only
such (awlhan) who are endowed with human qualities. See what the Quran has to
say about the land of Arabia.
"(Tell them Muhammad) that you have been ordered to
worship the Lord of this very city (Mecca), who has bestowed greatness"
(27:91 Annamul).
This is why the prophet of Arabia made Mecca the focus of
human veneration rather than Delhi or Karachi. Consider the following Quranic
verse:
"Fools will ask why should Muslims (now) turn away
from the qibla (which they faced before)? You (O Mohammed) the West and the
East belong to God. Whom he wishes, he turns towards the right path. (2:142
al-baqra)
When there is no way of distinguishing West from East, why
was it necessary to reject the Bait-ul-Muqaddas and make Mecca the qibla? This
is explained in verse 144:
(O Muhammad) We are seeing you turn towards the sky
again and again. So we will now order you to face the qibla you like (Mecca).
Turn your face to the Masjid-e Haram (Kaaba), and wherever you may be (when
saying the Namaz), turn and face the Masjid."
Although people have conjured up arguments in regard to
the change in the qibla, this change was made in accordance with the wishes of
the Prophet of Arabia, because he wished to make his homeland the center of
veneration and make it superior to all other lands. What is wrong with that ?
His descent was among the Arabs, and he was the first of all an Arab prophet.
His guidance of other nations was to be through the mediation of the Arabs. For
the spiritual aggrandizement of the Arabs, it was necessary that the qibla be
not Jerusalem but Mecca.
Nationalism and patriotism are very closely related.
Consider the following Hadith, whose veracity is not questioned by any
commentator.
"God has appointed the children of Ishmael (the
Prophet's ancestor and son of Abraham) the best among all mankind. God has
selected as best among all people the Quraish (the Prophet's tribe). From
among the Quraish, God has chosen the Banu Hashim as the best family, and
among the Banu Hashim, God has chosen the Prophet as the best of men. (Jame
Tirmizi, vol. II)
Four facts are obvious from this Hadith, and they are all
related to racial pride:
1) The children of Ishmael (the Arabs) are the best
people in the world,
2) Quraish is the best tribe in the world,
3) The Banu Hashim is the best family in the world,
4) Muhammad is the best man in the world.
Only fools refuse to accept the obvious veracity of these
facts, and being swayed by emotions, bring forth false arguments for their own
advantage. The above facts make it clear that the Prophet believed in
nationalism, and wished to make a ruling nation of the Arabs. Please examine the
following Hadiths carefully:
1) May God ruin those who try to mock the Quraish
(Prophet's tribe) (Jame Tirmizi, vol.II)
2) (Whatever be the conditions), for better or for
worse, the Quraish are the rulers of the people till the Day of Judgment. (Sahih
Tirmizi, vol. I)
3) Even if only two people are alive in the world,
the right to rule will be available only to the Quraish.
These Hadiths are not only accepted by tradition, but
history is witness to their authenticity. The Arabs ruled Spain for 800 years,
but not one of those rulers was a non-Quraish. The five hundred year long
history of Baghdad bears testimony to the fact that all Arab rulers were Quraish.
What is this if not nationalism ? The fact of the
matter is that even the international character of Islam is founded on
Arab-worship. I have just quoted the verse according to which Mohammad (PBUH) is
a role model for all people. The implication of this verse is that a true Muslim
is one who is a follower of the Prophet of Arabia in every way. Not only should
he be like the Prophet in speech, thought, food, dress, etc., but also should he
hold the land of Arabia in the same esteem which the Prophet, by virtue of being
Arab, had for it. It is clear that the purpose behind Islamic imperialism is
Arab-worship, because it is incumbent on non-Arab Muslims as an article of
faith.
In view of these facts, it cannot be denied that Iqbal
has presented the Quranic view of nationalism in a false light, in his own best
interests. What was his interest ? I will discuss this later but here I wish to
make it clear that he did all this on purpose. He says:
Do not compare the 'millet' with the nations of the
West, The nation of the Hashemi Prophet is unique in its form. Their groups are
dependent upon country and race; Your group is mighty due to the power of faith.
If the hem of the cloak of the faith slips from your
hand,
What will happen to your people ?
And if your people be lost to you,
Then so will the 'millet' be.
1) If there were a gold medal for spreading
misinformation, the first verse of this poem would be a candidate for it. I have
just quoted a Hadis in which the Prophet says, "Of the Quraish, God has
chosen the Banu Hashim as best, and among the Banu Hashim, God has chosen
Mohammad as the best."
It is patently clear that Hashemiyat refers to
ancestry, that is, to kinship ties. It has nothing to do with religion. Only the
Prophet's relatives are within the sphere of "the nation of the Hashemi
Prophet", i.e. the Hashemi tribe. But people like Iqbal and me, being
Indians, cannot even conceive of that.
Iqbal had been so carried away by his ego, that he
brazenly contradicted the Prophet and gave his own ideas the status of a Hadith.
The Prophet has said, "Love of homeland is (part) of faith", but Iqbal
takes the opposite stance:
The biggest of these latter-day gods is the homeland,
Its dress is the shroud of the faith.
The idol carved by modern civilization,
Is a robber of the house of the Prophet's faith.
Your arms are mighty with the strength of the 'tauhid';
Islam is your religion, you are of the Mustapha.
Show the world the ancient picture,
O follower of Mustapha ! throw this idol into the dust !
If you are victims of circumstance, the result will be destruction,
Be like a fish free in the ocean.
To abandon the homeland is the way dear to God,
Testify to the truth of Prophethood.
Homeland in the language of politics is one thing,
Homeland in the teaching of the Prophet is quite another.
For this very reason competition exists between the nations of the world,
For this reason, subjugation has become the end of trade.
For this reason is politics devoid of truth,
For this reason is the houses of the poor robbed.
For this reason does the creature of God get divided into nations,
For this reason the roots of Islam are cut off.
What a fine piece of patchwork this misinformation is !
Taking a
critical look at it, the following facts become clear:
(2) The Prophet of Arabia says that the love of the
homeland is (part of) religion, but Iqbal calls the homeland "the biggest
idol of the new gods", and calls for breaking them.
He calls the cloak of the homeland the coffin of
religion. He was Indian. But perpetual slavery had put his national
consciousness to sleep by singing lullabies of self-forgetfulness. Otherwise he
would have known that the Turks are a nation in spite of being Muslim, and that
as Turks they have ruled over several Muslim nations. It is another matter that
the Muslims of India, having lost national feeling, raised slogans supporting
the Turkish Caliphate, thus expressing their own bankruptcy.
(3) In order to sweep away the Indian Muslims in a tide
of religious feeling, he says "Islam is your homeland, you are of the
Mustapha".
This is not even a good metaphor, as Islam cannot be
compared to a homeland. This is merely a move to exploit religious sentiment.
According to modern psychology, a lion's territory is
his homeland, or the branch on which a bird perches or nests is its homeland.
Even a desert rat considers its hole a homeland, and will fight to the death to
save it.
(4) God forbid, he says that "giving up the
homeland is the way of love of God". The Prophet had not left his homeland
because he hated it, but because he had been forced to leave it.
Have I falsified the facts, or has Iqbal ignored the
truth ? You can decide for yourself by reading the following Hadis:
" Mecca is the world's best place, and I prize it
above everything else. If my people had not sent me away from here, no other
place would have been acceptable to me as a residence." (Jame Tirmizi,
vol. II)
There is a big difference between "leaving" a
place and being "sent away from it". But Iqbal has deviated from the
facts, for the sake of his own propaganda.
(5) To say this is a clear example of violation of
Quranic principles:
"This makes the creature of God (mankind) get
divided into nations, and causes the roots of the Islamic nation to get
chopped off."
As I have said earlier, God Himself says, "If I had
wanted, I would have had people be born into a single nation". But he has
distributed mankind into nations and tribes, and has also said that this
distribution -- nationality, is the identity of the peoples. Whom is one
supposed to believe, Iqbal or God ?
I have recently written a long article in English named
"The Tale of Two Gujarati Saints", in which I have critiqued
the work of Gandhi and Jinnah, and clarified how the demands of their egos
crystallized in the form of the partition of India. However, in this article
(now published as a book), I did not ascribe any responsibility for the
country's partition to Iqbal because I believed that Iqbal envisaged the
creation of an Islamic province in a Federal India. But when I looked at the
same subject a second time, I reached the following conclusion. The
responsibility of preparing the Indian Muslims mentally for the partition of the
country falls upon Allama Iqbal. But for this, the majority of Indian Muslims
would not have been ready to accept the leadership of M.A. Jinnah. Iqbal's
writings numbed the critical faculties of the people, who were carried away by
emotion, and mistook fiction for fact, and punishment for reward. This certainly
is proof of Iqbal' greatness as a poet. But his scholarship is found to be
defective.
The ideas which I have expressed are not my own
original opinions, because the ulema had often expressed similar views even
before the partition of India. Maulana Hussein Ahmad Madni was a great scholar
of theology. Iqbal had a discussion with him on the subject of nationalism. The
Maulana's point of view was that the Muslims are part of the Indian nation, by
virtue of being Indian, though we are part of the Islamic community (millat) by
virtue of being Muslims. Allama Iqbal was of the opinion that in Islam,
religious identity and nationality were the same thing, so the Muslims of the
world are one nation. His concept of nation not only makes nonsense of the
Islamic conception but also flies in the face of reason and evidence. If that
were the reality, there would not be countries like Afghanistan, Iran, Libya,
Syria, Iraq on the world map. There would be a single "Islamistan"
consisting of Muslims. Instead of waking up to his blunder, Iqbal ridiculed
Maulana Hussein Ahmad Madni:
The non-Arab world still does not know the secrets of
truth. Witness the meddler from Deoband that is Husain Ahmad, He chants from
the pulpit that the 'millet' has to do with the homeland.
How ignorant is he of the position of Mohammad of Arabia !
Iqbal exploited the mental hold over the minds and
hearts of the Muslims of the expression Muhammad-e Arabi. In this way, Iqbal
tried to keep the Muslims ignorant by drowning an intellectual in a sea of
emotion. This why people like Maulana Hussein Ahmad Madni, Maulana Abul Kalam
Azad, Syed Abdullah Bukhari not only were thwarted but also were considered
traitors by Muslims.
When Pakistan was created in 1947, I was a young man
full of love for the Prophet. I displayed great blood-thirstiness and
heartlessness trying to make the Pakistan movement successful. I am ashamed of
its consequences even today, but my acquaintances used to call me
"warrior-man" (mard-e mujahid). This gives an indication of the effect
and the reality of Iqbal's writings. People had taken leave of their critical
faculties, and become puppets of emotions. The same state of affairs continues
even today in Pakistan, owing to Iqbal's writings. Nobody seems to understand
that the concept of Pakistan has been a failure. Islamic law has not been
established here, nor will it ever be. What sort of country is this where sorrow
and misery is the lot of orphans and widows? Where injustice is considered
justice, hatred is considered love, and hunger is considered God's gift ? What
sort of nation is this where reprehensible tribalism is considered equality, and
killing and robbing are called Jihad ? What sort of country is this where the
reins of administration are in the hands of thieves and every office is
considered a business ? What sort of nation is this where crooks consider it
their right to dishonour young women ? kind of country is this where anarchy is
called law, bribes are considered the gift of God and usurpation of rights
considered the soul of Islam ? How long will this fiefdom of Waderas thrive on
the blood of the poor and the innocent ?
If the concept of Pakistan had brought the Muslims
empowerment, good fortune and national glory, I would dedicate my life to
singing its glories. After all, it is the land in which I was born, and on whose
soil I attained manhood, where my near and dear ones live and where my ancestors
are buried, and it is the land whose memories I carry in my veins. The cause of
Pakistan's failure is that it is in fact nobody's homeland. Before the formation
of Pakistan, the people who lived in this region called themselves Muslims at an
emotional level, but today there are at least five nations living there --
Muhajirs, Punjabis, Sindhis, Pathans and Baluch. Their regional loyalties are
boiling like lava, and may erupt and surface at any time. It seems that Pakistan
had never come under the rule of any ideological principle. If the 'Islamic
nation' were a fact, Pakistan would not have broken up into two parts so soon.
The Bangladesh story was the Islamic nightmare come true. What is surprising is
that Pakistan had come into existence for the Muslims of the subcontinent. It
proved to have no more reality than a mirage, for in 1951, entry to Pakistan was
forbidden to all Indian Muslims. What is more, for the last twenty years, two
and a half hundred thousand Bihari Pakistanis have been living a life of
degradation in the camps of Bangladesh. They are not allowed to enter Pakistan.
In this game of passing the buck, Bangladesh's Islamic nationalism is also
deplorable. On the grounds that they are Pakistanis, Bangladesh denies its
Muslim brothers citizenship of Bangladesh.
The facts not only puncture the myth of the Islamic
nation, but also reveal that the intentions of the Pakistani leaders were
dishonourable. Whatever they did was for their own popularity, and their
struggles were only directed at fooling the Muslims in furtherance of their
egotistic ends. These leaders, who raised slogans of "Love of the
Prophet" day and night, were not followers of the Prophet, but mockers of
the Prophet -- because Pakistan's leaders have not even thought about the
difficulties the Prophet cheerfully put up with, in order to organize the Arabs.
They have never proposed a model of action which would help Pakistanis feel as
one nation. The failure of Pakistan is proof that nations are made not out of
religion, but of kinship relations, patriotism, language, civilizational harmony
and economic links. Religion is only a weak link in this chain, which is
becoming weaker and weaker by the day. Since we are discussing Iqbal's actions,
the question arises why he was so obsessed with the concept of Pakistan, which
became a big obstacle for Pakistanis themselves. There seem to be two reasons
for this:
1) Hatred of Hindus
2) Friendship with Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani, and the obsession with personal
glory
Iqbal's hatred for Hindus in spite of his being of Brahmin
descent is surprising. It is well-known that by changing one's religion, one's
beliefs change, but to be free of all customs associated with the previous
religion is not easy. It is obvious that Hindu customs had some effect on Iqbal.
He was certainly aware of his Hindu heritage. This is why his early poetry was
permeated with feelings of Indianness. Consider a few examples. He says in his Tarana-i
Hind:
Better than the whole world is our India,
We are its nightingales, and it is our garden !
Religion does not teach mutual enmity,
We are Indians, and India is our homeland !
Until now the feeling of Indianness dominates over the
Islamic principle of separation, and he does not wish to break away from his
compatriots on grounds of religion. In "Nanak", he says:
The people did not pay any heed to the call of Gautama,
And did not recognise the value of their rare jewel;
Alas the wretched ones remained ignorant of the voice of truth,
Just as the tree knows not how sweet is its fruit.
He laid bare the secret of life,
But India was too proud of her philosophical thought.
It was not a stage illuminated by the flame of truth,
Grace fell in torrents but the soil was not fertile.
The Brahmin still remains drunk with conceit,
The flame of Gautama still burns among assemblies in foreign lands.
Allama Iqbal takes pride in his connections with the
Indian nation by quoting Mahatma Buddha, just as a bee takes delight in its
flower. He laments over the fact that the flame of truth lit by Gautama which
should have illuminated India, had to go to foreign land to dispel ignorance,
due to unfavourable conditions in India. In the poem "Ram", Iqbal
brings the message of Indian patriotism in such a manner that every Indian will
sway with pride:
India's cup overflows with the wine of truth,
All the philosophies of the West are contained in Ram of India!
It is the effect of the heaven-touching thought of the Indians,
That the height of India's roof is greater than that of the sky!
In this country there have been thousands of angelic disposition,
On account of whom the name of India is famous all over the world !
India is proud of Ram's existence,
People with discernment call him the Prophet of India.
It is a miracle wrought by this torch light of wisdom,
That the name of India outshines the morning sun !
Ram was a great swordsman, matchless in bravery !
He had no equal in purity, ardour and love !
The distinctive feature of this poem is that Allama Iqbal
took pride in the great man of his country and that he believed in Indian
hero-worship. "Naya Shivala" is a valuable poem by Iqbal. For the
reader's convenience, I will quote from it a second time:
Let me tell you truth, O Brahmin, if you would not be
offended,
The idols of your temple have become old.
You think that God dwells in images of stone,
But to me every particle of the soil of the homeland is a deity.
Come, let us lift up the curtain of estrangement,
Let us unite the separated, and wipe out all trace of duality.
The city of the heart has been desolate for a long time now;
Come let us build a new Shivala in this land.
In the song of the devotees are both Peace and Power,
The salvation of the earth's peoples is in love.
This was the time when Sir Iqbal not only believed that
"Sare Jahan se Accha Hindostan hamara", but also considered every
particle of India a deity. He was so proud of his Indianness that he wanted to
lift the curtains separating Hindu from Muslim, and make India a new "Shivala"
or "temple of Mahadev", that is motherland, whose foundation would be
India's own cultural traditions.
Every one who knows of the greatness of Indian
traditions is shocked and completely shaken up by the Allama's sudden distaste
for India. Why ? The answer to this question can be found in the following
statement by the late Allama's grandson, Munib Iqbal in the daily Jang, dated 8
May 1996: "Allama Iqbal's financial status was not good. He once requested
that he be made a judge, so that financial difficulties may come to an end.
However, the then Chief Justice Shadi Lal refused to accept him as a judge. If
Allama Iqbal had been accepted as a judge at this time, he would have followed
another path, and Pakistan would have remained behind."
To understand this event it is necessary to know that
it is an ancient custom among the Hindus that no one becomes a Hindu by
conversion. A Hindu is one who is Hindu by birth. Although nowadays the Arya
Samaj has relaxed this a little, Hindus still do not heartily accept any new
entrant. This principle of non-acceptance has made Hindus very bigoted and
narrow-minded, and has caused the Hindu nation's order to break down. In Allama
Iqbal's time, Hindu fanaticism was so great that they considered Muslims as low
and impure. To associate with them, to eat and drink together was out of
question. If they were touched by the hand of a Muslim, or even the shadow of a
Muslim fell on them, they would be considered 'impure' or fallen, and to regain
their purity they had to undergo various practices.
Sir Shadi Lal' refusal was a great setback for a man
like Iqbal whose grandfather was a Brahmin. What is more, being a pot, he was of
a sensitive disposition which the reasoning mind could not control. For Iqbal
the loss of the prestige of being a judge was such a blow that his emotional
make-up was turned upside down. He concluded that the gulf between Hindus and
Muslims was so deep that they could not stay together as brothers. Being a poet,
the Allama was carried away by feelings. He did not remember the duties of love
of homeland, which require that all those factors be suppressed which are
detrimental to the unity of the country. Anyway, a study of the life of the
Allama reveals that no matter of principle was involved. In the end he rejected
Indian nationalism and began singing the glories of the Islamic nation.
Now let us take a look at the second reason that caused
Iqbal to turn away from Indian nationalism and become a crusader for the Islamic
millet, although he was not at all interested in the millet. He was very proud
that his poetry was full of mystic qualities. For this reason, he thought that
he deserved a high place as a spiritual personage, so that Indian Muslims would
follow him. In this matter, his family background, which was influenced by
Ahmediyat proved very useful. His father had parted ways with Ahmediyat. Mirza
Ghulam Ahmad had become the focus of a lot of attention, and had been declared a
kafir by those who did not have faith in him. Thus by opposing Mirza Sahib,
Iqbal could attain some status. But he was not looking for ordinary recognition.
Being endowed with the gift of "mystic poetry", he aspired for
prophet-like renown. Mirza Sahib had become the target of Muslim criticism by
making claims of prophethood. Iqbal was on the lookout for any convenient
excuse. He remembered the Prophet's Hadis "La Nabi Ba'adi" (There is
no prophet after me). Muslims regarded Mirza Ghulam Ahmad with disapproval for
this very reason. So Iqbal devised an ingenious trick and made a claim of being
a "qalandar" (dervish mystic), which in fact amounted to nothing less
than the status of a "mujaddid" and a prophet. He had to be creative
so that his poetry would carry a message. So he repudiated Indian nationalism
and began to emphasize the Islamic millet. In order to add sting to his poetry,
he targeted the claims of prophethood made by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, although his
own claim of "qalandari" was also quite similar. (A long time ago, I
read a Hadis in one of Maulana Maududi's writings to the effect that Allah the
Most High sends a mujaddid (renewer) to revive Islam every century, but it is
not necessary that the mujaddid know that he is Allah's appointed one.)
If the Prophet is the Messenger of God, then can the
"mujaddid" who renews the message of the Prophet be any less in status
than the Prophet ? To attain such a status without even making a claim is
nothing short of miraculous. For in this way, there is no need to become the
target of the people's suspicions, or their criticism. Mirza Ghulam Ahmad
Qadiani had confronted Indian Muslims with such a big difficulty as they could
not even have conceived of before. A logical consequence of it was that they
maligned him, as no man had been maligned before. Punjabi Muslims had been
excited so much that they desperately needed an outlet for their emotions. To
gauge this state of affairs was not difficult. After all, Iqbal had not spent
years in Europe studying religion and philosophy in vain. Iqbal decided his
passport to glory lay in opposition to Mirza Ghulam Ahmad. His outlook was
completely revolutionized and he turned away from Indian nationalism, and sang
the tunes of the Islamic millet. In this bargain, repudiating Ahmadiyat proved
very useful. Iqbal's family background also played an important role.
Not only Iqbal's father -- Sheikh Noor Mohammad -- was
connected with the Ahmadiya community at some time, but also his wife Imam Bibi
was also a member of that community. His elder brother Sheikh Ata Mohammad was
also an Ahmedi, whose son Sheikh Aijaz Ahmed was also attached to this sect. It
was on account of this family background that Iqbal arranged for his son Aftab
Iqbal to be brought up as an Ahmadi in Qadian for several years. When Iqbal
suspected his wife's fidelity, he requested a fatwa not from Deoband but from
Qadian. Not only that, Iqbal accepted Mirza Ghulam Ahmad as a great
"religious thinker", and declared the Ahmedi community to be a
"clear example of the Islamic way". It has even been claimed that in
1897 Iqbal went to Qadian and became a disciple of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, and
remained in this faith till 1934.
I have no doubt in the truth of these claims. This is
because Ahmadi ideas had influenced him since childhood, on account of his
family background. If his father had not rejected Ahmadiyat, he would not have
felt the need to accept it himself. It was a consequence of his upbringing that
his ideas were influenced deeply by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad even in his youth. This
fact is borne out by the following poem which he wrote in defence of Mirza
Sahib's greatness. The context is that a Moulvi from Ludhiana Sa'adullah Sa'adi
had insulted Mirza Sahib in his writings. In those days, Allama Iqbal was an F.A.
student in the Scotch Mission School (Sialkot). Some verses from the poem Iqbal
wrote as a rejoinder are give below:
Bravo Sa'adi, we have seen your foul-mouthedness,
You will be greatly admired among the sweepers !
Your verses are a dirt-heap,
Your poetry full of rubbish,
Do not feel awed at the sight of the Sun of Truth;
Your master Satan will keep you in his shade.
Allama Iqbal has called Mirza Sahib "Sun of
Truth" and Sa'adi a disciple of the devil here. Why did Iqbal bid goodbye
to Ahmediyat in spite of such devotion ? The answer, it is said, is that Iqbal
wanted to become a member of the Viceroy's Council, which was a great honour
those days. But the position went to Chaudhary Zafarullah Khan, who was
considered one of the most influential Qadianis. This made a deep impression on
the late Allama who took it as a personal insult, and broke off ties with the
Ahmadiya community.
It is possible that there is some truth to this
incident. After all, the Allama began to dream of separation from Hindus and the
ruination of his homeland after being denied the post of judge. Moreover, Iqbal
was a politician whose aim is nothing other than the pursuit of power, and who
considers every such means valid as will take him to his goal.
From Allama Iqbal's writings it becomes clear that he
had a massive ego, which should be called 'bekiran khudi' (boundless ego) in his
own words. If this theory is kept in mind, it becomes clear that Ghulam Ahmad's
personality did not have the charm to keep Iqbal forever in its grip. After all,
his father had also parted ways with Ahmadiyat. That was an example and
inspiration for Iqbal. Perhaps the single biggest cause for this was that Iqbal
had a mercurial temperament, being a great poet. He found peace in impatience
and change. In addition, he had a wide vision, being acquainted with several
branches of knowledge. He was not a tortoise who would slavishly follow
Ahmadiyat. His character was possessed of the quickness of the hare. He
considered himself destined to discharge the duties of leadership, so that he
could go whichever way he chose at any rate he pleased. This is why he waited
for the right moment for a long time. In 1935 when a debate began with the
purpose of declaring Ahmedis as non-Muslims, Iqbal also declared his opposition
to Ahmediyat openly. Coincidentally it was the same year when Chaudhary
Zafarullah Khan was appointed as a member of the Viceroy Council.
There is a famous joke about Maulana Mohammad Ali.
Somebody wanted to find out about his religious convictions and asked him
whether he would have supported Amir Mu'awiya or Hazrat Ali, if he had been
around during the Caliphate of Rashid. The Maulana smiled and asked back:
"What kind of a question is this ? If I were around at that time, I would
have worked for myself."
What ready wit ! He was a politician and he has
expressed the psychology of a politician with great cleverness. A leader is not
an imitator, but a self-promoter who can take to any path to move forward. The
distinction between Shia and Sunni depends upon this prudence and the
fulfillment of plans.
Mirza Ghulam Ahmad's original claim was that he was a
prophet. The "seal of the prophets" (khatam un-nabiyyin) is a divine
seal. This seal can never be broken. However it is possible that the Prophet (PBUH)
could come to the world, not once but a thousand times, in the cloak of a
prophet. This appearance was a post appointed by Allah the Most High.
In the Quranic sura (Al-Ahzab 33:40) it is said of
Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) "wa lakan rasul-ul-lah wa khaatam un-nabiyyin"is
the messenger of God, and is the seal of the prophets. For centuries, Muslims
believed that prophethood ended with Mohammad Mustapha, because no prophet will
come after him. However when Mirza Ghulam Ahmad argued that the "seal of
the prophets" means that the Holy Prophet is the 'seal' authenticating
prophets, and any prophet who comes in the future, cannot be called a prophet
without the 'seal' of the Prophet. Such a prophet would be like a shadow of the
Prophet. The reason for this is said to be that after the descent of the Holy
Prophet (PBUH), to think of an actual prophet is to insult the Prophet.
God Forbid, this argument is an insult to Allah the
Most High, who is claimed to be completely independent and self-sufficient (qadir
e motlagh), If He were to be prevented from sending future prophets merely for
the sake of Mohammad's glory, then He cannot claim to be independent. The
learned ulema opposed Mirza Ghulam Ahmad vehemently. However the latter praised
the Prophet profusely and declared himself his slave. Some people were convinced
by his argument. So Iqbal has referred to this fact in his poem "Punjabi
Mussalman:
The reality is that he wishes to make innovation in
religion;
Whatever be his destination, he will pass very soon.
He does not participate in the game of truth,
In the race to be a follower, he will lose very soon.
If a hunter were to lay the trap of 'exposition',
It would fall off the nested branch very soon.
In fact, the poem could equally well apply to Allama Iqbal.
However, there is a difference. Whereas Mirza Sahib had to pay a heavy price for
his claim to prophethood, Iqbal's claims were so appealing that people flocked
to him very eagerly. Just as the claims of being a Mahdi and a Messiah were
inherent in Mirza Sahib's claims of prophethood, Iqbal's claim of being a "qalandar"
also smacked of the same. Allama Iqbal says of himself:
Sana'i was saying to Rumi in Paradise,
In the East, people still drink the same stew from the same bowl.
But of Hallaj it is said, he thought that finally,
It was a 'qalandar' who laid bare the secret of ego.
While satirizing Mirza Ghulam Ahmad's claims of being a
Mahdi, Allama Iqbal the 'qalandar' quietly presents himself as being a Mahdi:
Everyone is trapped in prisons of his own making,
Whether it is the pole stars of the East or the planets of the West;
Whether it is the venerable men of the Church,
Or the Shaikhs of the Mosque,
There is no modernism in speech or in deed,
There is only the wrangling of the politicians.
The poet is trapped in this poverty of imagination,
The world is in need of a true Mahdi,
Whose glance will be an earthquake in the world of thought.
Allama Iqbal was so proud that his glance was an
"earthquake in the world of thought". So he is the Mahdi who claims to
be a "possessor of secrets". He says in the poem "Imamat"
(Leadership):
You have asked me the secret of leadership;
May God make you like me a possessor of secrets.
He alone is the true leader of your time,
Who makes you discontent with the present state of affairs;
Who shows you the face of a friend in the mirror of death,
And makes life even more burdensome for you;
Who heats your blood with the feeling of his words,
And makes you a sword steeled with asceticism.
But he who makes Muslims worship their overlords,
Is nothing but trouble for the glorious 'millet'.
In the last verse of the poem, the Allama has given vent
to the grievance he had against Mirza Sahib. Mirza Sahib's has been accused of
English-worship and so his "leadership" has been called "trouble
for the glorious 'millet'".
Mirza Ghulam Ahmad had claimed the status of a mystic
on account of his claim of prophethood. Allama Iqbal attacks him on this grounds
as well. Under the title, "IlhAm aur AzAdI" (Inspiration and Freedom),
he writes:
The slave will become free if possessed of inspiration,
Its touch is a goad for thought and deed.
Its warm breath has such an effect
That the soil of the garden begins to sparkle.
The power of the falcon manifests in the nightingale,
How wonderfully do change the birds which herald the morn !
The company of such a self-aware God-intoxicated man
Bestows upon beggars the glory of Jam and Parvez !
God save us from the inspiration of the enslaved !
That is a tyrant and a form of Changez !
Mirza Sahib had pretensions to prophethood, the Allama
prides himself on being a representative of the Prophet. In his poem "O
Soul of Muhammad" he writes very ingeniously:
The organisation of the 'millet' is broken down,
Now please tell me where your Muslim is to go !
The delight of tumult is gone from the sea of Arabia,
Where is the storm hidden in me to go ?
The camel-driver is alone, without caravan or company,
In this mountain and desert, where is he to go ?
Please reveal this secret, O soul of Muhammad !
Where is the guardian of the Divine Verses to go ?
Iqbal declares himself to be a guardian of the divine
verses. Addressing the soul of Mohammad, he says that the spirit of Arabia is
not as before; he asks the Prophet himself to advise him how, with the storm of
faith he has inside himself, to fulfill the responsibility that is his, by
virtue of being the caretaker of the Divine Verses.
Just as Mirza Sahib wants to spread Islam, bound by
duties of prophethood, Allama Iqbal being the guardian of the Quran wants to
defend Islam, although fuqr (being a fakir) and 'qalandari' (being a dervish),
being parts of Sufism are definitely unIslamic. Even then the masses are
enchanted by Iqbal. It is another matter that the learned ulema declared that
Iqbal's hortatory speeches were a danger to Islam. However, being a lover of the
prophet, Iqbal escaped a fatwa of infidelity. Nevertheless, in spite of being a
powerful man, he did not have the good fortune to attain his cherished goal.
Mirza Sahib and Allama Sahab had the same goal in mind.
Both claimed spiritual leadershiż’’’
To restrain the flood of spirituality was very
difficult,
And at last the 'qalandar' spoke out the secrets of the Book aloud !
Mirza Sahib's "advent as a prophet" is
completely unQuranic, and so is Iqbal' s "qalandari". Iqbal was a
grave-worshiper. To pray at graves is considered by the Quran as reason for one
to go to hell (102: 1-5). "Qalandari" is a part of Sufism. It has
nothing to do with the Quran. It is an extension of Vedic principles. I have
dealt with this issue in several of my writings, so that there is no reason to
repeat them here. By calling "qalandari" a part of the "love of
he Prophet", Iqbal has laid the foundation of an Islam whose connection
with the Quran is completely illusory.
To glorify the Prophet so much that he seems to
overshadow Allah Himself, is a potent weapon of self-promotion among ambitious
people in he world of Islam. Not only is it the best means for politicians to
get power, but also the most effective method to attain the status of a prophet
or a "qalandar". This is because Muslims are so conditioned by the
Honourable Name of the Prophet of Allah that they are completely mesmerized
immediately upon hearing it. They become like sheep, and their spiritual
shepherds an take them wherever they wish. Allama Iqbal also took this route to
success and glory. As an example, I invite you to look at his "Ishq-e
Rasool" (Love of the Prophet):
A storm such that O Iqbal, it carries me
In the direction of Hejaz.
In spite of this love, Iqbal never undertook the blessed
hajj in his lifetime. Is this what a real devotee would do ? If we bear in mind
that the motive behind this writing was economical, the truth immediately
surfaces.
The same is the case with Iqbal's principle of Khudi
(Ego), whose basis was considerations of poverty and freedom from want. But he
drew a stipend from the Nawab of Bhopal. Besides he also took interest from his
bank deposits, whereas taking and giving interest are both forbidden under
Islam.
A perusal of his writings reveals that his view of
Islam was based on Jihad with the sword. That was also the supporting pillar of
his dervishhood, qalandari and khudi. He has used the falcon as a metaphor for
these ideas. For instance, he writes:
To swoop, to retreat, and retreating swoop,
Is but an excuse to keep the blood warm.
I am a 'darvesh' in the world of the winged,
And the falcon does not build a nest.
Here is the "mujahid" outlook which he turned
into an ornament in his poetry:
Give the youths my magical sigh,
Give wings to the fledgling falcons;
O God, my wish is only this-
May the light of my insight be known to all !
The principle of Jihad has become Allama Iqbal's guiding
light, which he prays will become widespread. But what is the Islamic principle
of Jihad and its aim ? It is explained in the sura Al-Tauba (9:25) of the Quran:
"Make war upon those who do not believe in God and
the day of Judgment and who do not cease to do the things forbidden by God and
his Messenger... Fight (such people) until they are defeated and pay the Jizya".
According to this verse, only one who is a "mujahid"
and believes in Jihad with a sword is a Muslim. His duty is to subdue
non-Muslims and make them pay him the Jizya. This is why the Quran has called
Islam "the victorious religion". Without practicing the Jihad
principle, Islam cannot be a victorious faith so that anybody who claims to be a
Muslim and also be loyal to a non-Muslim ruler, and who prays for his prolonged
rulership, is neither a Muslim nor a "mujahid" !
The fact is that Allama Iqbal cannot stand this test.
There is so much evidence in this regard that to commit it to writing would
require a whole book. So, for clarification, I will present only a few examples:
1) While the people of Punjab could not set up a state
owing to the absence of a national framework, they have always been renowned for
their military prowess. Thus in the First World War, the English felt the need
to recruit in particular 200,000 lion-hearted youths from the Punjab, but this
number was very great. If the soldiers had rebelled, English rule would have
been seriously challenged. For this reason, the Government demanded that the
people of India openly declare their loyalty to the British Crown. Now the
person who declared his loyalty to the non-Muslim government in broad daylight
was Allama Iqbal:
Declaration:
Our sincerity and devotion is unconditional,
Ours service is unconditional and so is our obedience.
Our oath of loyalty and love is unconditional,
And so is our faithfulness to the Imperial Throne.
On this occasion of loyalty, may my head be accepted !
A trifling gift from the faithful may please be accepted !
Not content with the declaration of loyalty, Allama Iqbal
also expressed his desire for the continued existence of British rule:
As long as there are roses in gardens,
As long as tulips are dressed in red;
As long as nightingales delight in the morning breeze,
As long as the flower-bud thirsts for the dewdrop;
May this just government endure,
May the falcon continue to obey the gentle pheasant.
It must be remembered that during the war, the number of
Punjabi soldiers exceeded 360,000 of which more than half were Muslims, who
fought against the Turks in countries like Egypt, Palestine and Iraq in which
lie several Islamic holy places. According to the Quran, a Muslim who kills
another Muslim will go to hell. And yet, Allama Iqbal who was a spokesman for
the Islamic millet sent Punjabi Muslims to kill Turkish, Palestinian, Egyptian
and Iraqi Muslims.
2) When the Khilafat movement began, Indian Muslims
expressed their disaffection with the English government. They gave their jobs,
and boycotted government schools, colleges and universities. Hundreds of
hotheads declared India a "house of infidelity" and began to emigrate.
The "infidel Hindus" respected Muslim sentiments and participated in
their Khilafat movement. However, Iqbal bestowed upon the enthusiasts of this
movement the appellation "Brothers of Satan". He remained completely
unattached to this movement. The English Government knighted him in recognition
of his loyalty, and Iqbal accepted it happily. The reaction of the Muslims to
this event can be gauged from the following verses by Maulana Salik:
He was once the crown of the head of the glorious
'millet',
But now listen, he has become a Sir of the Crown !
In the cold streets, I heard a wag say,
Iqbal has placed his head at the door of the Crown !
3) On the occasion of Queen Victoria's passing away, Iqbal
wrote an elegy of 110 verse, which was so poignant that the British Government
published it at its own expense under the title "Tears of Blood" and
had a few thousand copies distributed. In this elegy, it is said referring to
Queen Victoria,
"O India, the shadow of God has left your
head".
To declare a non-Muslim as the "shadow of God"
upon Muslims is a blasphemy against Islam, and an act of 'Kufr'. Likewise at the
coronation of Edward the Eighth, Iqbal wrote:
May the 'Homa' announce our good fortune,
For our Emperor was crowned today !
The people of India have sworn loyalty to him;
Our hearts are dedicated to the dust of his feet !
Is this an act befitting a "qalandar" ? It is
clear from these facts that Iqbal was an opportunistic man of the world. This is
why his son Javed Iqbal and grandson Munib Iqbal "do not accept his
spiritual stand". His claim of "qalandari" was comparable to
Mirza Ghulam Ahmad's claim of prophethood. In his poem "Indian
Muslim", he writes:
The religious code of the possessors of prophethood of
Punjab,
Says that this age-old believer is an infidel !
Any Muslim who denied Mirza Ghulam Ahmad's claim of
prophethood was declared a Kafir, just as any Jew or Christian, who did not
accept the Prophethood of Mohammad of Arabia, was, in spite of being a member of
the People of the Book. Therefore the Muslims of India felt the need for an
Islamic champion who would announce their steadfastness in the faith loud and
clear. Allama Sahib knew that he had a golden opportunity in the form of the
declaration of "qalandari". Sadly, however, he was so lost in the
fulfillment of the demands of his ego that he did not remember his own Tarana-i
Hind, whose verses sill play upon the lips of every man, great or small:
Better than the whole world is our India,
We are its nightingales, and it is our garden !
He plunged into the unfathomable depths of emotionalism,
and said such improper things which are in stark opposition to the principle
embodied in the Prophet's Hadis: "Love of homeland is (part) of the
faith"did all this in the name of Islam for his own popularity. Lack of
concern for the nation and homeland is the hall-mark of his writings:
The architect of Arabia has made it different from
everything else in the world,
The foundation of the fortress of the 'millet' is not the unity of the
homeland;
Whether Iqbal is the conceptual father of the idea of
Pakistan or not is another question. However, without his nation-breaking party,
the plan of partitioning India would not have succeeded. It is a consequence of
his ideas that crores of Muslims in India have become strangers in their
homeland. The responsibility for Pakistan's moral downfall and political and
economic decline is also his. The regions of United India in which Muslim
regional governments were certain to come to power were much greater in area
than that of Pakistan. This would have worked to the Muslims' advantage. The
emotional fires of Iqbal's views tarnished the Islamic element of Indian
nationhood. Was he a nation-builder or a nation-deceiver ? The fact of the
matter is that a "millet" without nationality is an emotional mirage.
This is a fact clear from the history of living nations.
The claims of prophethood and "qalandari" are
both un-Quranic conceptions. Both are aimed at nothing other than
self-aggrandizement. They should be considered from the spiritual point of view
as two links of the same chain. Both are equally at variance with the Quranic
idea of nationhood. Since every nation has a prophet, the real purpose behind
his advent is the upliftment of the nation. This fact is made amply clear by the
life story of the Prophet. The Prophet carried a backward nation like the Arabs
to the heights of progress, but which was Mirza Sahib's nation, and which nation
did he uplift ? At least he founded a sect within Islam, but unlike him, Allama
Iqbal destroyed the very fabric of the Indian nation, of which he seemed to be
proud. I wonder how it occurred to him to say:
Ja'far of Bengal, Sadeq of Dakan,
Disgraces to the millet, to the faith and the Watan.
|
Previous
Essay
